Here you go. Two tonight. I'll post more tomorrow and the day after tomorrow as well. haha......sorry.
Shrek
Review by Jon Waterman
***
Shrek is an ogre living in a land full of fairy tale creatures. He keeps to himself in solitude, content to know that the rest of the world hates and fears him. It’s just him and his swamp. One day, Lord Farquaad, expels all the talking animals and magical beings, etc from his kingdom and into Shrek’s backyard. The only way for him to get things back to normal is by traveling to a far off castle and rescue a fair princess for Farquaad to marry.
You’d probably guess at first glance that this is a kids movie. But you’d be only half right. It’s not even a family movie. It’s an everyone movie. Adults without kids should feel free to check it out and enjoy it.
The film plays well to all ages and groups, because it’s drawing from universal appeals and shared storybook knowledge to create myriad jokes geared towards particular age groups. There are references in there directed towards older people, but kids will laugh at those jokes, too. Children do so, because either their parents are laughing and they want to act like they get it, or because the characters are acting goofy and silly. This broad reach is extremely tough to come by and a lot of credit is due to the team of writers (4 primary and several additional – too many names to list here) for creating this blend. There’s no real shortage of laughs, but the script tends to lean more towards the wittier side of things. The movie provides a nice mix of comedic elements, which overtake the blah, uneventful story.
The story was too linear for my tastes, and so I would have liked a side-story or two to mix it up. There’s only so much forest path you can stand before you get bored looking at it. There’s only so much of a group of characters you can stand before wanting to see what someone else may be up to. But, even though the storyline was dull, the way it was presented impressed me. I’m not talking about the animation (I will in a second, though. Hold your donkeys). I’m talking about the direction and the emotions conveyed through camerawork. Directors Andrew Adamson and Vicky Jenson know how to pick angles and use dissolves very effectively. They also brought out the best performances from their actors (Mike Meyers as Shrek, Cameron Diaz as the Princess and Eddie Murphy as Donkey, the tagalong sidekick).
One thing I really hated about their choices was the music. They use contemporary or pop songs throughout. The opening credits play to “All-Star” by Smashmouth. What that has to do with the story, I’ll never know. The film is filled with songs that usually carry the mood, but lyrically don’t live up to the rest of the production’s high standards.
The animation looks ok. The facial expressions come across well, however they work better on the more cartoony things than on the awkward looking humans. The movement isn’t as fluid as I would like, especially when it’s frantic. Anytime a character runs, it’s pretty jerky and looks odd. The scenery somehow manages to integrate itself while at the same time remaining in the background. The whole style is light and aides the storybook feel.
The movie is very entertaining and should be worthwhile viewing for anyone. Those not easily amused with physical humor may not find it too laugh-out-loud funny, but take solace in the drier wittier moments the film also includes. It’s cute, it’s funny, it’s incredibly charming (more so than the prince), and it’ll probably win you over.
++++++
The Day After Tomorrow
Review by Jon Waterman
*1/2
Well, looks like the world as we know it is going to come to an end. The polar icecaps have melted and are now causing freak weather occurrences such as tornadoes in Hollywood. Very rapidly, most of the northern hemisphere will become subject to tremendous storms and floods which will freeze over with temperatures so cold, lives will end instantly. A new ice age is coming. As if that weren’t bad enough, the scientist who predicted this tragedy must trek over the snow across several states to reach his son who’s trapped in New York. Oh my.
For a global disaster movie, there wasn’t a whole lot going on. There was the main storyline and a tiny bit of side story with three scientists in Glasgow, but that’s it. You were either with the father or the son. Neither of them I cared to follow. To be honest, I didn’t really see the point of the father going to get the son with the deadly storms fast approaching in the first place. He only had gear and supplies for himself and his crew. What were they going to do when they got there? Maybe I let my mind wander during that explanation, but it seemed like a horribly trite way to create more tension when the storm and the general need for survival could and should be enough. Add to that the wolf thing…. The son was gathered up with some people in the New York Public Library. They teased us with a couple short interchanges between an intellectual teenager and a male librarian. Those were fun to watch and I wanted to see more of that kind of thing. The relationship stuff (romantic or non) didn’t work for me. Show us how this is affecting several different groups of people, not just one family.
Obviously in a big budget blockbuster like this, the science is going to be off to aid the story. So, I don’t care how plausible some of this stuff is. What I care about is does it look cool. Yeah...kinda…I guess. It’s what you’d expect. Nothing here will surprise you or wow you. You either saw it in the poster or in the commercial or in your mind beforehand. Despite what they’d have you believe, there’s no poignant imagery here. The Statue of Liberty is surrounded by snow and ice. So what? Show us the world’s monuments. What would have been really nice would be to show how society begins adapting after the snow has settled and societies can resume with their new situation.
The acting was pretty good, though. We have professional, legitimate actors (Jake Gyllenhaal, Dennis Quaid, Ian Holm) doing the best they can with some cheesy summer flick dialogue.
So, the story sucked. The effects were standard, but director/co-writer Roland Emmerich (“Independence Day”) tried to impact us in the wrong way. The acting was above average. Despite what I wanted to see and didn’t, the film was still fun overall. I can’t for the life of me figure out why some of the story choices were made, but hey. It’s summer. Just let it go.
Shrek
Review by Jon Waterman
***
Shrek is an ogre living in a land full of fairy tale creatures. He keeps to himself in solitude, content to know that the rest of the world hates and fears him. It’s just him and his swamp. One day, Lord Farquaad, expels all the talking animals and magical beings, etc from his kingdom and into Shrek’s backyard. The only way for him to get things back to normal is by traveling to a far off castle and rescue a fair princess for Farquaad to marry.
You’d probably guess at first glance that this is a kids movie. But you’d be only half right. It’s not even a family movie. It’s an everyone movie. Adults without kids should feel free to check it out and enjoy it.
The film plays well to all ages and groups, because it’s drawing from universal appeals and shared storybook knowledge to create myriad jokes geared towards particular age groups. There are references in there directed towards older people, but kids will laugh at those jokes, too. Children do so, because either their parents are laughing and they want to act like they get it, or because the characters are acting goofy and silly. This broad reach is extremely tough to come by and a lot of credit is due to the team of writers (4 primary and several additional – too many names to list here) for creating this blend. There’s no real shortage of laughs, but the script tends to lean more towards the wittier side of things. The movie provides a nice mix of comedic elements, which overtake the blah, uneventful story.
The story was too linear for my tastes, and so I would have liked a side-story or two to mix it up. There’s only so much forest path you can stand before you get bored looking at it. There’s only so much of a group of characters you can stand before wanting to see what someone else may be up to. But, even though the storyline was dull, the way it was presented impressed me. I’m not talking about the animation (I will in a second, though. Hold your donkeys). I’m talking about the direction and the emotions conveyed through camerawork. Directors Andrew Adamson and Vicky Jenson know how to pick angles and use dissolves very effectively. They also brought out the best performances from their actors (Mike Meyers as Shrek, Cameron Diaz as the Princess and Eddie Murphy as Donkey, the tagalong sidekick).
One thing I really hated about their choices was the music. They use contemporary or pop songs throughout. The opening credits play to “All-Star” by Smashmouth. What that has to do with the story, I’ll never know. The film is filled with songs that usually carry the mood, but lyrically don’t live up to the rest of the production’s high standards.
The animation looks ok. The facial expressions come across well, however they work better on the more cartoony things than on the awkward looking humans. The movement isn’t as fluid as I would like, especially when it’s frantic. Anytime a character runs, it’s pretty jerky and looks odd. The scenery somehow manages to integrate itself while at the same time remaining in the background. The whole style is light and aides the storybook feel.
The movie is very entertaining and should be worthwhile viewing for anyone. Those not easily amused with physical humor may not find it too laugh-out-loud funny, but take solace in the drier wittier moments the film also includes. It’s cute, it’s funny, it’s incredibly charming (more so than the prince), and it’ll probably win you over.
++++++
The Day After Tomorrow
Review by Jon Waterman
*1/2
Well, looks like the world as we know it is going to come to an end. The polar icecaps have melted and are now causing freak weather occurrences such as tornadoes in Hollywood. Very rapidly, most of the northern hemisphere will become subject to tremendous storms and floods which will freeze over with temperatures so cold, lives will end instantly. A new ice age is coming. As if that weren’t bad enough, the scientist who predicted this tragedy must trek over the snow across several states to reach his son who’s trapped in New York. Oh my.
For a global disaster movie, there wasn’t a whole lot going on. There was the main storyline and a tiny bit of side story with three scientists in Glasgow, but that’s it. You were either with the father or the son. Neither of them I cared to follow. To be honest, I didn’t really see the point of the father going to get the son with the deadly storms fast approaching in the first place. He only had gear and supplies for himself and his crew. What were they going to do when they got there? Maybe I let my mind wander during that explanation, but it seemed like a horribly trite way to create more tension when the storm and the general need for survival could and should be enough. Add to that the wolf thing…. The son was gathered up with some people in the New York Public Library. They teased us with a couple short interchanges between an intellectual teenager and a male librarian. Those were fun to watch and I wanted to see more of that kind of thing. The relationship stuff (romantic or non) didn’t work for me. Show us how this is affecting several different groups of people, not just one family.
Obviously in a big budget blockbuster like this, the science is going to be off to aid the story. So, I don’t care how plausible some of this stuff is. What I care about is does it look cool. Yeah...kinda…I guess. It’s what you’d expect. Nothing here will surprise you or wow you. You either saw it in the poster or in the commercial or in your mind beforehand. Despite what they’d have you believe, there’s no poignant imagery here. The Statue of Liberty is surrounded by snow and ice. So what? Show us the world’s monuments. What would have been really nice would be to show how society begins adapting after the snow has settled and societies can resume with their new situation.
The acting was pretty good, though. We have professional, legitimate actors (Jake Gyllenhaal, Dennis Quaid, Ian Holm) doing the best they can with some cheesy summer flick dialogue.
So, the story sucked. The effects were standard, but director/co-writer Roland Emmerich (“Independence Day”) tried to impact us in the wrong way. The acting was above average. Despite what I wanted to see and didn’t, the film was still fun overall. I can’t for the life of me figure out why some of the story choices were made, but hey. It’s summer. Just let it go.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home